BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING: SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES

Transcription

1 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING: SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES by Aaron Hottenstein Graduate Research Assistant Texas Transportation Institute Shawn Turner, P.E. Assistant Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute and Gordon Shunk, P.E. Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Research Report Research Study Number Research Study Title: Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel Demand Forecasting for Existing and Proposed Transportation Facilities Sponsored by the Texas Department of Transportation In Cooperation with U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration September 1997 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas

2 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-98/ Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL DEMAND September 1997 FORECASTING: SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES Technical Report Documentation Page 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Aaron Hottenstein, Shawn Turner, and Gordon Shunk Research Report Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas Contract or Grant No. Study No Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Research Report: Research and Technology Transfer Office September August 1997 P. O. Box Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Research Study Title: Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel Demand Forecasting for Existing and Proposed Transportation Facilities 16. Abstract This report summarizes data collection activities performed at eight different sites in Texas urban areas. The data were collected to help develop and test bicycle and pedestrian travel demand forecasting techniques. The research team collected data about actual bicycle and pedestrian facility usage rates (i.e., 12-hour volume counts) and trip characteristics (i.e., trip origin and destination, length, purpose, and frequency). The volume count and survey data were collected on bicycle and pedestrian facilities in College Station, Austin, Houston, and Dallas. The research team developed several preliminary findings from the data collection activities. The usage levels at data collection sites ranged from high-use side streets (Timber/Bizzell Street, Shoal Creek Boulevard) to highuse separated paths (Brays Bayou Trail and White Rock Lake Trail) to low-use state highways (FM 2818, RM 2222). Also, usage levels varied considerably for some sites during the three days of data collection. There was no apparent explanation for this day-to-day variability at some sites, but the research team will investigate this issue in future data analysis tasks. Useful information was gathered about bicycle and pedestrian trip generators and trip length distributions. This trip information will be particularly useful for developing and testing demand forecasting models. Several of the sites had low survey response rates, which means that the trip information gathered at these sites may not be representative of the entire bicycle and pedestrian population. The researchers may have to supplement sites having low survey response rates with information from other sites or studies. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Travel Demand Forecasting, Bicycle, Pedestrian, Non-motorized Travel, Sketch Planning, Modeling No restrictions. This document is available to the public through NTIS: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 106 Form DOT F (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

3

4

5 DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Texas Department of Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. This report was prepared by Aaron Hottenstein, Shawn Turner (Texas certification number 82781), and Gordon Shunk (California certification number 0936). v

6 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to acknowledge the support and guidance of Maria Burke, Project Director, of TxDOT s Design Division. Other members of the project advisory panel who offered comments on the data collection plan include: Stan Burrier, Transportation Planning and Programming Division, TxDOT Paul Douglas, Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator, Multimodal Division, TxDOT Glenn Gadbois, Executive Director, Texas Bicycle Coalition Jacqueline Magill, District Bicycle Coordinator, Austin District, TxDOT Bob Musselman, Region 6, Federal Highway Administration The authors also wish to thank the following undergraduate students who assisted in reducing and summarizing the bicycle and pedestrian data: Alisha Irion Stephanie Key Mary Tinsley Thomas Wilson, Jr. A special thanks is extended to Troy Rother for supervising data reduction and preparing report graphics. vi

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES... ix LIST OF TABLES...xii CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION...1 Organization of this Report...2 CHAPTER 2 - STUDY DESIGN...3 Data Collection Site Selection...3 Video Data Collection...4 Intercept Survey Distribution...10 CHAPTER 3 - DATA REDUCTION AND SUMMARY...11 Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes...11 Bicyclist and Pedestrian Trip Lengths...17 Bicycle Trip Purpose...21 Bicycle and Pedestrian Trip Frequency...21 Survey Comments...21 CHAPTER 4 - SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS...25 APPENDIX A: 12-HOUR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN VOLUME COUNTS...A-1 APPENDIX B: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP ORIGINS/DESTINATIONS AND TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTIONS...B-1 APPENDIX C: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP PURPOSE AND FREQUENCY...C-1 APPENDIX D: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SURVEY COMMENTS...D-1 vii

8

9 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1. Site Locations in College Station...5 Figure 2. Site Locations in Austin...6 Figure 3. Site Locations in Houston...7 Figure 4. Site Locations in Dallas...8 Figure 5. Intercept Survey Card...10 Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in College Station, March 19-21, Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Austin, April 16-18, Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Houston, May 6-8, Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Dallas, May 20-22, Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in College Station, March 19-21, Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Austin, April 16-18, Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Houston, May 6-8, Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Dallas, May 20-22, Figure 14. Bicycle Trip Purpose for All 8 Texas Sites...22 Figure 15. Pedestrian Trip Purpose for All 8 Texas Sites...22 Figure A-1. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) in College Station, March 19-21, A-5 Figure A-2. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Timber/Bizzell Street in College Station, March 19-21, A-5 Figure A-3. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on FM 2818 in College Station, March 19-21, A-6 Figure A-4. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Welsh Avenue in College Station, March 19-21, A-6 Figure A-5. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin, April 16-18, A-7 Figure A-6. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on RM 2222 in Austin, April 16-18, A-7 Figure A-7. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Loop 360 in Austin, April 16-18, A-8 Figure A-8. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Allen Parkway in Houston, May 6-8, A-9 Figure A-9. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Brays Bayou Trail in Houston, May 6-8, A-9 Figure A-10. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on South Main Street in Houston, May 6-8, A-10 Figure A-11. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Royal Lane in Dallas, May 20-22, A-11 Figure A-12. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Greenville Avenue in Dallas, May 20-22, A-11 Figure A-13. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on White Rock Lake Trail in Dallas, June 3-5, A-12 Figure A-14. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) in College Station, March 19-21, A-13 Figure A-15. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Timber/Bizzell Street in College Station, March 19-21, A-13 ix

10 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) PAGE Figure A-16 Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on FM 2818 in College Station, March 19-21, A-14 Figure A-17. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Welsh Avenue in College Station, March 19-21, A-14 Figure A-18. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin, April 16-18, A-15 Figure A-19. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on RM 2222 in Austin, April 16-18, A-15 Figure A-20. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Loop 360 in Austin, April 16-18, A-16 Figure A-21. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Allen Parkway in Houston, May 6-8, A-17 Figure A-22. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Brays Bayou Trail in Houston, May 6-8, A-17 Figure A-23. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on South Main Street in Houston, May 6-8, A-18 Figure A-24. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Royal Lane in Dallas, May 20-22, A-19 Figure A-25. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Greenville Avenue in Dallas, May 20-22, A-19 Figure A-26. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on White Rock Lake Trail in Dallas, June 3-5, A-20 Figure B-1. Trip Origins and Destinations at FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) and Timber/Bizzell Street...B-5 Figure B-2. Trip Origins and Destinations at FM 2818 and Welsh Avenue...B-6 Figure B-3. Trip Origins and Destinations at RM 2222 and Shoal Creek Boulevard...B-7 Figure B-4. Trip Origins and Destinations on Loop 360 at the Colorado River...B-8 Figure B-5. Trip Origins and Destinations on Allen Parkway at Taft Street...B-9 Figure B-6. Trip Origins and Destinations at Brays Bayou Trail and South Main Street...B-10 Figure B-7. Trip Origins and Destinations at Royal Lane and Greenville Avenue...B-11 Figure B-8. Trip Origins and Destinations at White Rock Lake Trail and Mockingbird Lane...B-12 Figure B-9. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by Site Location...B-13 Figure B-10. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by City...B-14 Figure B-11. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by Site Location...B-15 Figure B-12. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by City...B-16 Figure B-13. Pedestrian Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by City...B-17 Figure B-14. Pedestrian Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by City...B-18 x

11 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) PAGE Figure C-1. Bicycle Trip Purpose at FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) and Timber/Bizzell in College Station...C-5 Figure C-2. Bicycle Trip Purpose at FM 2818 and Welsh Avenue in College Station...C-5 Figure C-3. Bicycle Trip Purpose at RM 2222 and Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin...C-6 Figure C-4. Bicycle Trip Purpose on Loop 360 in Austin...C-6 Figure C-5. Bicycle Trip Purpose on Allen Parkway and Taft Street in Houston...C-7 Figure C-6. Bicycle Trip Purpose at Brays Bayou Trail and South Main Street in Houston..C-7 Figure C-7. Bicycle Trip Purpose at Royal Lane and Greenville Avenue in Dallas...C-8 Figure C-8. Bicycle Trip Purpose at White Rock Lake Trial in Dallas...C-8 Figure C-9. Pedestrian Trip Purpose at FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) and Timber/Bizzell in College Station...C-9 Figure C-10. Pedestrian Trip Purpose at FM 2818 and Welsh Avenue in College Station...C-9 Figure C-11. Pedestrian Trip Purpose at RM 2222 and Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin..C-10 Figure C-12. Pedestrian Trip Purpose on Allen Parkway and Taft Street in Houston...C-11 Figure C-13. Pedestrian Trip Purpose at Brays Bayou Trail and South Main Street in Houston...C-11 Figure C-14. Pedestrian Trip Purpose at Royal Lane and Greenville Avenue in Dallas...C-12 Figure C-15. Pedestrian Trip Purpose on White Rock Lake Trial at Mockingbird Lane in Dallas...C-12 Figure C-16. Bicycle Trip Purpose for All 8 Texas Sites...C-13 Figure C-17. Pedestrian Trip Purpose for All 8 Texas Sites...C-13 Figure C-18. Bicycle Work Trip Frequency...C-14 Figure C-19. Bicycle Recreation Trip Frequency...C-14 Figure C-20. Bicycle School Trip Frequency...C-15 Figure C-21. Pedestrian School Trip Frequency for all 8 Texas Sites by Trip Purpose...C-16 Figure C-22. Pedestrian Work Trip Frequency...C-16 Figure C-23. Pedestrian Recreation Trip Frequency...C-17 Figure C-24. Pedestrian Personal Trip Frequency...C-17 Figure C-25. Pedestrian School Trip Frequency...C-18 Figure C-26. Pedestrian Other Trip Frequency...C-18 xi

12 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Data Collection Site Locations...4 Table 2. Description of Data Collection Sites...9 Table 3. Average 12-Hour Bicycle Volumes...11 Table 4. Average 12-Hour Pedestrian Volumes...16 Table 5. Bicycle Trip Length Summary Statistics...18 Table 6. Pedestrian Trip Length Summary Statistics...19 Table 7. Bicycle Trip Purpose Summary Statistics...20 Table 8. Pedestrian Trip Purpose Summary Statistics...20 Table 9. Average Bicycle Trip Frequency for All Samples...23 Table 10. Average Pedestrian Trip Frequency for All Samples...23 Table C-1. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency at FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) and Timber/Bizzell Street...C-19 Table C-2. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency at FM 2818 and Welsh Avenue...C-19 Table C-3. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency at RM 2222 and Shoal Creek Boulevard...C-20 Table C-4. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency on Loop 360 at the Colorado River...C-20 Table C-5. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency on Allen Parkway at Taft Street...C-21 Table C-6. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency on Brays Bayou Trail at South Main Street..C-21 Table C-7. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency at Royal Lane and Greenville Avenue...C-22 Table C-8. Average Bicyclist Trip Frequency on White Rock Lake Trail at Mockingbird Lane...C-22 xii

13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The overall research goal for TxDOT study is to develop a methodology that will provide TxDOT personnel with the information and a decision-making framework to assess existing and proposed travel demand by bicyclists and pedestrians. The research objectives and progress to date are as follows: Identify existing information for travel demand forecasting for bicycle and pedestrian travel. The literature review contained in Report identifies and describes a number of related studies and ongoing research related to bicycle/pedestrian demand forecasting methods. Identify the factors affecting selection of bicycle/pedestrian travel. The literature review in Report enumerates a number of factors that influence bicycle/pedestrian demand, categorized mostly as land use and demographics characteristics. Assess the influence of factors related to selecting bicycle/pedestrian travel. The relative influence of various land use and demographic factors are highlighted in Report Assess whether influential factors for NMT are indicated but data is insufficient, and recommend additional data collection if necessary. After assessing the factors thought to influence bicycle and pedestrian travel, the research team agreed that it would be necessary to collect survey data about bicycle and pedestrian travel in Texas. This report (1723-2) documents these data collection activities. Develop relationships between influential factors and bicycle/pedestrian travel. This will be accomplished in the second year of this study. Develop several models addressing the affect of influential factors on bicycle/pedestrian travel. This will be accomplished in the second year of this study. 1

14 Evaluate models for forecasting utility. This will be accomplished in the second year of this study. The end product for this research study will be a single document containing the findings of validity testing for several bicycle and pedestrian travel demand forecasting models. Should one or more models be validated, detailed documentation will be developed for the future use of these models by TxDOT. A validated demand forecasting model will provide a consistent framework for evaluating and prioritizing existing and proposed corridors for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. TTI Research Report , Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel Demand Forecasting: Literature Review, document several demand forecasting methodologies that could be tested for validity. The objective of the data collection activities documented in this report was to gather sufficient information about bicycle and pedestrian trip characteristics and usage levels in Texas to test and/or adapt these existing methodologies for use by TxDOT. Organization of this Report This report contains a summary of the data collection activities performed in the spring of The data were collected for the purposes of developing and testing bicycle and pedestrian travel demand forecasting techniques. The report is divided into the following sections: Chapter 1: Introduction - presents the objectives for this research study; Chapter 2: Study Design - describes the study design and data collection procedures used in this study; Chapter 3: Data Reduction and Summary - summarizes the bicycle and pedestrian usage and trip data collected in the spring and summer of 1997; and, Chapter 4: Summary of Findings and Conclusions - provides major findings and conclusions from this task of the study. 2

15 CHAPTER 2 STUDY DESIGN This chapter describes the study design and data collection procedures used in this study. The research team used video cameras to record facility usage over several days and distributed intercept survey cards at the sites to collect information about bicycle and pedestrian trip characteristics. The following sections provide more detail on these data collection activities. Data Collection Site Selection For this study, eight sites were selected in four Texas cities: College Station, Austin, Houston, and Dallas. (Table 1 and Figures 1 to 4). Several criteria determined site selection: Adequate provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities; Relatively high levels of use; Geometric and traffic characteristics typical of state roadways; Trip purposes predominantly transportation-related; and, Ability to position video data collection equipment. The researchers performed site surveys in College Station, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Dallas, and Tyler to investigate potential data collection sites. Initially, the researchers experienced difficulty in identifying state roadways with adequate bicycle/pedestrian provisions and high levels of use. Consequently, several of the data collection sites were chosen where high-use facilities intersected with state roadways. Also, several shared-use trails were selected because of their high levels of use for transportation purposes. The number of sites were spread geographically among the urban areas of Texas, and the bicycle and pedestrian facilities at these sites incorporate a number of different design characteristics and adjacent land uses. Table 2 describes the characteristics of the roadways at each site. 3

16 Table 1. Data Collection Site Locations City and Date of Data Collection Site Location College Station, March 19-21, 1997 Austin, April 16-18, 1997 Houston, May 6-8, 1997 Dallas, May and June 3-5, 1997 FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) at Timber/Bizzell Street FM 2818 at Welsh Avenue RM 2222 (Allendale Road) at Shoal Creek Boulevard Loop 360 at the Colorado River Allen Parkway at Taft Street Brays Bayou Trail at South Main Street Royal Lane at Greenville Avenue White Rock Lake Trail at Mockingbird Lane Video Data Collection The data collection method used portable video cameras mounted on a towable trailer assembly. The video cameras recorded pedestrian and bicycle volumes at each data collection site. Researchers taped each site for twelve hours on every day of a three-day period, resulting in a minimum of 36 hours of video for each site. The videotape was then reduced in the office. Bicycle and pedestrian volumes were counted on all videotapes and compiled for the use in the calibration of demand forecasting models for Texas. This data collection began on March 19, 1997 and ended on June 5,

17 Figure 1. Site Locations in College Station 5

18 Figure 2. Site Locations in Austin 6

19 Figure 3. Site Locations in Houston 7

20 Figure 4. Site Locations in Dallas 8

21 Table 2. Description of Data Collection Sites Primary Corridor Intersecting Corridor Site State Street Type Bike/Ped Anticipated State Street Type Bike/Ped Anticipated Street Highway? and Cross Facilities Bike/Ped. Usage Street Highway? and Cross Facilities Bike/Ped. (Yes/No) Section (Yes/No) Section Usage 1 FM 2347 (Geo. yes 4-lane 2-way bike moderate Bizzell/ no 2-lane sidewalk high Bush Dr.), divided lanes, sidewalk, commuter, Timber collector commuter College Station arterial jogging path recreational Street 2 FM 2818, yes 4-lane 1.2 m shoulders low recreational Welsh Street no 2-lane bike lanes/ moderate College Station undivided collector sidewalks on commuter, arterial both sides recreational 3 RM 2222, yes urban major sidewalks on low recreational Shoal Creek no 2-lane bike lanes/ moderate Austin arterial both sides Boulevard collector sidewalks on commuter, both sides recreational 9 4 Loop 360, yes suburban m high recreational Courtyard no 2-lane local sidewalk low Austin state shoulders Drive highway 5 North no urban minor parallel bicycle high recreational, Main Street no 4-lane sidewalks low Brayswood, arterial and jogging trail moderate undivided Houston commuter arterial 6 Allen Parkway, no 6-lane parallel bicycle high recreational, Shepherd no 3-lane one sidewalks, moderate Houston divided and jogging trail moderate way pair dirt paths recreational, arterial commuter low commuter 7 Royal Lane, no 4-lane parallel bicycle moderate Greenville no 4-lane sidewalks on low Dallas undivided path recreational, low Avenue undivided both sides commuter arterial commuter arterial 8 Mockingbird no suburban parallel bicycle high recreational, Vicinity of n/a Lane, Dallas minor path low commuter White Rock arterial Lake

22 Intercept Survey Distribution While the sites were being videotaped, a worker was assigned the task of distributing color coded survey cards (Figure 5) to bicyclists and pedestrians during peak and off-peak periods of travel. The survey cards were in the form of a postage prepaid postcard that recipients could take with them to complete and mail in at a later date. The survey cards consisted of five questions that will be used to supplement the National Personal Transportation Survey data base and the 1990 Census Journey-to-Work. Howdy! The Texas Transportation Institute is conducting a survey of bicyclists and pedestrians for the Texas Department of Transportation. The results of the survey will be used to improve conditions for bicycling and walking in the state of Texas. Please take 5 minutes to answer the following questions, then stick the postcard in any U.S. mailbox. If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Shawn Turner at (409) Thanks for your cooperation. Where did your trip begin? (closest intersection/building) What is your final destination? (closest intersection/building) What is the purpose of this trip? (circle one) Work Recreation Shopping Personal Other: Typically, how much time do you spend making this trip? How many times per week do you make this trip by biking or walking? (count your return trip) Any other comments? Figure 5. Intercept Survey Card 10

23 CHAPTER 3 DATA REDUCTION AND SUMMARY Bicycle and Pedestrian Volumes The bicycle and pedestrian volumes were counted for a period of 36 hours at all eight Texas locations. Bicycle and pedestrian volumes were reduced to illustrate the 12-hour volumes on each roadway at all site locations. Twelve-hour counts typically account for about 90 to 95 percent of the daily volume during the time of data collection. Figures 6 through 13 illustrate the 12-hour bicycle and pedestrian volumes grouped according to city and facility. Tables 3 and 4 show the average 12- hour bicycle and pedestrian volumes. Table 3. Average 12-Hour Bicycle Volumes Facility Average 12-hour Bicycle Volume FM 2347 (George Bush Drive 161 Timber/Bizzell Street 314 FM Welsh Avenue 73 RM Shoal Creek Boulevard 112 Loop Allen Parkway 169 Brays Bayou Trail 195 South Main 15 Royal Lane 111 Greenville Avenue 2 White Rock Lake Trial

24 500 Number of Bicycles Wednesday Thursday Friday FM 2347 Timber/Bizzell FM 2818 Welsh Location Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in College Station, March 19-21, Number of Bicycles Wednesday Thursday Friday FM 2222 Shoal Creek Loop 360 Location Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Austin, April 16-18,

25 500 Number of Bicycles Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Houston, May 6-8, Allen Parkway Braeswood South Main Location Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Number of Bicycles Figure Hour Bicycle Counts in Dallas, May 20-22, Royal Lane Greenville Ave. White Rock Lake Location (June 3-5, 1997) Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 13

26 Number of Bicycles FM 2347 Timber/Bizzell FM 2818 Welsh Location Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in College Station, March 19-21, Wednesday Thursday Friday Number of Bicycles FM 2222 Shoal Creek Loop 360 Wednesday Thursday Friday Location Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Austin, April 16-18,

27 800 Number of Pedestrians Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 Allen Parkway Braeswood South Main Location Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Houston, May 6-8, Number of Bicycles Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 Royal Lane Greenville Ave. White Rock Lake Location (June 3-5, 1997) Figure Hour Pedestrian Counts in Dallas, May 20-22,

28 Table 4. Average 12-Hour Pedestrian Volumes Facility Average 12-Hour Pedestrian Volume FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) 92 Timber/Bizzell Street 74 FM Welsh Avenue 38 RM Shoal Creek Boulevard 26 Loop Allen Parkway 626 Brays Bayou Trail 168 South Main Street 108 Royal Lane 67 Greenville Avenue 26 White Rock Lake Trail 81 The locations where there are high bicycle and pedestrian volumes provide adequate sidewalks and bicycling areas. White Rock Lake Trail, which has the highest amount of bicycle volume, is located near a high-use recreational park area in Dallas. The trail along White Rock Lake connects to many other trails that distribute cyclists into the surrounding areas. Timber/Bizzell Street, which has the second highest bicycle volume, is located at Texas A&M University and is a direct connection to the university for many students. The facilities provided along Timber/Bizzell Street allow many cyclists to travel to the campus. Allen Parkway and Brays Bayou Trail are separated shared use paths that attract a large amount of bicyclists for the purposes of recreation and commuting. 16

29 Locations where high pedestrian volumes were observed were Allen Parkway, Brays Bayou Trail, and South Main Street. The large volumes at Allen Parkway can be attributed to a high amount of activity over the lunch hour (from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m.). During this time, pedestrian volumes ranged between 200 and 250 people. To provide further detail, the bicycle and pedestrian volumes were examined on an hourly level (Appendix A). The most common trend seen in the hourly data shows an increase in bicycle and pedestrian activity during the late afternoon and early evening hours. Figures A-1 through A-26 contain 12-hour bicycle and pedestrian volumes for all locations. Bicyclist and Pedestrian Trip Lengths Using the origin and destination information provided on the survey cards, it was possible to determine the distances that people travel from their origins to the site locations and to their destinations. Researchers geo-coded the surveys into geographic information system (GIS) software and calculated straight-line distances (trip lengths). Geo-coding is the process of assigning coordinates on a map to a piece of information. In this case, the survey cards asked respondents their origins and destinations, the origins and destinations were assigned coordinates on a maps of the respective cities. Appendix B contains information about the trip origins and destinations, and also contains more detailed information on the trip length distributions. Researchers calculated distances from the origin to site location (O-S) and site location to destination (S-D). To calculate the total straight line distance that a person traveled, the combination of the origin to site location and site location to destination distances were added together to determine the approximate total distance (O-D). In some cases, researchers used judgement to determine origins and destinations that could not be found on the map data base used for geo-coding. The research team used information obtained from the calculation of trip distances to develop trip length probability curves. The average distance that people surveyed travel on bicycle from their 17

30 origin to the site location is approximately 3.2 km (2.0 mi) and their total average trip length from origin to destination is 6.3 km (3.9 mi). Graphs showing cumulative percent of trip lengths (Figures B-9 to B-10) illustrate that 50 percent of people travel 2.4 km (1.5 mi) or less from their origin to site location by bicycle and 50 percent of people travel 5.2 km (3.3 mi) or less from their origin to destination by bicycle. Table 5 contains bicycle trip length summary statistics for all eight sites. Table 5. Bicycle Trip Length Summary Statistics Site Location Number of Surveys Average Distance, km (mi) Origin-Site Origin-Destination FM 2347 and Timber/Bizzell (1.02) 2.99 (1.86) FM 2818 and Welsh (0.94) 5.15 (3.20) RM 2222 and Shoal Creek (2.75) 9.31 (5.78) Loop (3.68) (7.75) Allen Parkway (1.50) 4.07 (2.53) Brays Bayou Trail (2.52) 6.94 (4.31) Royal Lane and Greenville Ave (2.61) 9.13 (5.67) White Rock Lake Trail (3.35) 8.45 (5.25) Entire Sample (2.00) 6.39 (3.97) The average distance that people are willing to walk from their origin to their site locations is approximately 1.9 km (1.2 mi) and the average distance that pedestrians are willing to travel from their origin to destination is approximately 4.0 km (2.5 mi). Appendix B contains more detailed information on trip length distributions. For example, 50 percent of the pedestrian population surveyed are willing to travel approximately 1.3 km (0.8 mi) from their origin to the site locations (Figure B-11) and 50 percent of those pedestrians are willing to travel 2.9 km (1.8 mi) from their origin to destination. Table 6 contains the pedestrian trip length summary statistics for all eight sites that were surveyed. 18

31 Table 6. Pedestrian Trip Length Summary Statistics Site Location Number of Surveys Average Distance, km (mi) Origin-Site Origin-Destination FM 2347 and Timber/Bizzell (0.91) 2.70 (1.68) FM 2818 and Welsh (0.52) 1.98 (1.23) RM 2222 and Shoal Creek (0.62) 2.17 (1.35) Loop n.a. n.a. Allen Parkway (1.39) 4.25 (2.64) Brays Bayou Trail (0.59) 1.67 (1.04) Royal Lane and Greenville Ave (1.57) 8.86 (5.50) White Rock Lake Trail (1.19) 4.41 (2.74) Entire Sample (1.08) 3.76 (2.34) Distances were also sorted by trip purpose over the entire sample to allow for the examination of the distances that bicyclists and pedestrians travel for various purposes. The sorting of trip purpose at each site would have yielded low sample sizes, so all sites were combined when examining trip lengths by trip purpose. For example, the average distance that people cycle to work is 5.7 km (3.6 mi) and pedestrians travel 3.3 km (2.0 mi). Tables 7 and 8 provide bicycle and pedestrian trip lengths organized by trip purpose. 19

32 Table 7. Bicycle Trip Purpose Summary Statistics Trip Purpose Number of Surveys Average Distance, km (mi) O-S O-D Work km (1.87 mi) 5.74 km (3.57 mi) Recreation km (2.71 mi) 8.81 km (5.47 mi) Shopping km (2.50 mi) 6.36 km (3.95 mi) Personal km (2.06 mi) 7.52 km (4.67 mi) School km (0.85 mi) 2.80 km (1.74 mi) Other km (1.67 mi) 8.52 km (5.29 mi) Table 8. Pedestrian Trip Purpose Summary Statistics Trip Purpose Number of Surveys Average Distance, km (mi) O-S O-D Work km (0.94 mi) 3.34 km (2.08 mi) Recreation km (1.20 mi) 4.07 km (2.53 mi) Shopping 0 n.a. n.a. Personal km (0.72 mi) 2.25 km (1.40 mi) School km (0.48 mi) 1.68 km (1.05 mi) Other km (1.41 mi) 4.61 km (2.87 mi) 20

33 Bicycle Trip Purpose Researchers entered responses from the returned survey cards into a data base file for further analysis. As of July 23, 1997, 175 bicycle and 69 pedestrian surveys have been returned and entered into the data base. The data base information was then analyzed to determine the trip purposes of the cyclists and pedestrians surveyed. Figures 14 and 15 show the trip purposes for all the returned surveys. Recreation and work purposes were the most frequent responses for bicycling and pedestrian activities. Appendix C contains more detailed information on trip purposes for the eight sites. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trip Frequency Trip frequency is the number of times in a week that an individual makes a particular trip. Survey respondents were asked the number of times per week that they made a particular trip, including the return trip. Table 9 shows the average trip frequency by trip purpose for the entire population surveyed. The average bicycle trip frequencies for each site location were also computed and can be found in Appendix C. Due to the small number of pedestrian surveys, the summary of pedestrian trip frequencies was kept to the entire sample. The average trip frequencies by trip purpose can be found in Table 10. Graphs showing the cumulative percent of people versus trip frequency can be found in Appendix C. Pedestrian trip frequencies for all trip purposes can also be found in Appendix C. Survey Comments Bicyclists and pedestrians that responded to the survey had space to include general comments. The comments ranged widely, from favorable comments related to the conduct of this study, to suggestions for improvement in bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Appendix D contains all comments received through this study. 21

34 School 17% Other 1% Personal 2% Shopping 1% Work 46% Recreation 33% n=175 Figure 14. Bicycle Trip Purpose for all 8 Texas Sites Other 20% Work 9% School 7% Personal 10% Recreation 54% n=69 Figure 15. Pedestrian Trip Purpose for all 8 Texas Sites 22

35 Table 9. Average Bicycle Trip Frequency for All Samples Purpose Number of Surveys Average Trip Frequency Work Recreation 53 6 Shopping 1 3 Personal 4 4 School Other 2 7 Table 10. Average Pedestrian Trip Frequency for All Samples Purpose Number of Surveys Average Trip Frequency Work 6 9 Recreation 32 7 Shopping 0 0 Personal 6 7 School 5 11 Other

36

37 CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS This chapter summarizes preliminary findings and conclusions of the data collection efforts. In the next task, the research team will examine the collected data more carefully in an attempt to develop and test bicycle and pedestrian demand forecasting procedures. The preliminary findings and conclusions from the data collection activities can be summarized into the following points. The data collection activities incorporated a range of sites with varying street and land use characteristics and bicycle/pedestrian usage levels. The usage levels at data collection sites ranged from high-use side streets (e.g., Timber/Bizzell Street, Shoal Creek Boulevard) to high-use separated paths (e.g., Brays Bayou Trail and White Rock Lake Trail) to low-use state highways (e.g., FM 2818, RM 2222). Information at each site about adjacent land uses, street characteristics, and trip survey data should enable the research team to identify those factors which most strongly affect usage at each site. Useful survey information was gathered about trip generators and trip length distributions. This trip information will be particularly useful in comparing the measured usage levels to predicted usage levels from several models that will be tested. Additional one-day site surveys may be necessary to confirm collected data and collect any additional data about trip generators and adjacent land uses. Usage levels varied considerably for some sites during data collection. The usage levels were fairly constant across the three full days of data collection at some sites (e.g., Welsh Avenue, Brays Bayou Trail); however, other sites (e.g., Allen Parkway, White Rock Lake Trail) had considerable variability of use between the three days of data collection. There is no apparent explanation for this day-to-day variability at some sites, but the research team will investigate this issue in the next research task. 25

38 Some sites have very low survey response rates. Several of the sites had low survey response rates, which means that the trip information gathered at these sites may not be representative of the entire bicycle and pedestrian population. In the next research task, the survey information will be compared among sites to determine any significant differences. The researchers may have to supplement sites having low survey response rates with additional information from other sites or studies. 26

39 APPENDIX A 12-HOUR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN VOLUME COUNTS A-1

40

41 APPENDIX A: 12-HOUR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN VOLUME COUNTS This appendix summarizes the bicycle and pedestrian volume counts performed at eight sites in Texas. The research team used video cameras to record bicycle and pedestrian activity at the designated intersections, and the video was reduced at a later date in the office. A minimum of three days of data was collected at all sites. In most cases, these three days were the middle weekdays (i.e., Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday). At sites where high recreational traffic was expected on the weekend, data were collected on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. Figures A-1 through A-13 summarize the 12-hour bicycle volume counts, and Figures A-14 to A-26 summarize the 12-hour pedestrian volume counts. A-3

42

43 Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thrusday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-1. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) in College Station, March 19-21, Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-2. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Timber/Bizzell Street in College Station, March 19-21, 1997 A-5

44 25 Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-3. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on FM 2818 in College Station, March 19-21, Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-4. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Welsh Avenue in College Station, March 19-21, 1997 A-6

45 Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-5. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin, April 16-18, Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-6. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on RM 2222 in Austin, April 16-18, 1997 A-7

46 25 Hourly Bicycle Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-7. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Loop 360 in Austin, April 16-18, 1997 A-8

47 Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday :00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-8. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Allen Parkway in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-9. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Braes Bayou Trail in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 A-9

48 25 Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-10. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on South Main Street in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 A-10

49 60 50 Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-11. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Royal Lane in Dallas, May 20-22, Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-12. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on Greenville Avenue in Dallas, May 20-22, 1997 A-11

50 Hourly Bicycle Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday :00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-13. Hourly Bicycle Volumes on White Rock Lake Trail in Dallas, June 3-5, 1997 A-12

51 25 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-14. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) in College Station, March 19-21, Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-15. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Timber/Bizzell Street in College Station, March 19-21, 1997 A-13

52 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-16. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on FM 2818 in College Station, March 19-21, Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-17. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Welsh Avenue in College Station, March 19-21, 1997 A-14

53 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-18. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin, April 16-18, 1997 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-19. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on RM 2222 in Austin, April 16-18, 1997 A-15

54 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Wednesday Thursday Friday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-20. Hourly Pedestrian Volume on Loop 360 in Austin, April 16-18, 1997 A-16

55 300 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-21. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Allen Parkway in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 Hourly Pedestrian Volume :00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-22. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on Braes Bayou Trail in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 Tuesday Wednesday Thursday A-17

56 25 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-23. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on South Main Street in Houston, May 6-8, 1997 A-18

57 25 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-24. Hourly Pedestrian Volume on Royal Lane in Dallas, May 20-22, 1997 Hourly Pedestrian Volume :00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-25. Hourly Pedestrian Volume on Greenville Avenue in Dallas, May 20-22, 1997 Tuesday Wednesday Thursday A-19

58 50 45 Hourly Pedestrian Volume Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 0 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Starting Hour Figure A-26. Hourly Pedestrian Volumes on White Rock Lake Trail in Dallas, June 3-5, 1997 A-20

59 APPENDIX B BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP ORIGINS/DESTINATIONS AND TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTIONS B-1

60

61 APPENDIX B: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP ORIGINS/DESTINATIONS AND TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTIONS This appendix summarizes the bicycle and pedestrian trip origins/destinations and trip length distributions. Intercept survey postcards were distributed during the video data collection to as many passing bicyclists and pedestrians as possible. Bicyclists and pedestrians at the data collection site were asked to mail the postage-paid survey back to the research team, and the survey responses were summarized and geo-coded into a geographic information system (GIS). The GIS software was then used to analyze the bicycle and pedestrian trip characteristics. Figures B-1 through B-8 illustrate the trip origins and destinations in relation to the data collection site. Figures B-9 through B-14 present the bicycle and pedestrian trip length distributions. B-3

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71 Probability FM 2347 and Timber/Bizzell FM 2818 and Welsh FM 2222 and Shoal Creek Loop 360 Braes Bayou Trail Allen Parkway Royal Lane and Greenville Ave. White Rock Lake Entire Sample Distance (kilometers) Figure B-9. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by Site Location

72 Probability Entire Sample College Station Austin Houston Dallas Distance (kilometers) Figure B-10. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by City

73 FM 2347 and Timber/Bizzell FM 2818 and Welsh FM 2222 and Shoal Creek Loop 360 Braes Bayou Trail Allen Parkway Royal Lane and Greenville Ave. White Rock Lake Entire Sample Probability Distance (kilometers) Figure B-11. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by Site Location

74 Entire Sample College Station Austin Houston Dallas Probability Distance (kilometers) Figure B-12. Bicycle Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by City

75 1.00 Probability College Station (15 Samples) Houston (34 Samples) Dallas (15 Samples) Entire Sample Distance (kilometers) Figure B-13. Pedestrian Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location) by Site Location.

76 College Station (15 Samples) Houston (34 Samples) Dallas (15 Samples) Entire Sample Probability Distance (kilometers) Figure B-14. Pedestrian Trip Length Probability (Origin to Site Location to Destination) by City

77 APPENDIX C BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP PURPOSE AND FREQUENCY C-1

78

79 APPENDIX C: BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRIP PURPOSE AND FREQUENCY This appendix summarizes the bicycle and pedestrian trip purpose and frequency. Intercept survey postcards were distributed during the video data collection to as many passing bicyclists and pedestrians as possible. Bicyclists and pedestrians at the data collection site were asked to mail the postage-paid survey back to the research team, and the survey responses were summarized into computer spreadsheet software. The spreadsheet software was then used to summarize the bicycle and pedestrian trip characteristics. Figures C-1 through C-17 summarize the bicycle and pedestrian trip purpose for each of the eight sites. Figures C-18 through C-26 present the bicycle and pedestrian trip frequency distributions. Tables C-1 through C-8 summarize the bicyclist trip frequency by trip purpose for each site. C-3

80

81 Other 2% School 43% Work 55% Figure C-1. Bicycle Trip Purpose at FM 2347 (George Bush Drive) and Timber/Bizzell in College Station n=60 School 23% Personal 8% Work 69% Figure C-2. Bicycle Trip Purpose at FM 2818 and Welsh Avenue in College Station n=13 C-5

82 Shopping 3% Personal 6% Recreation 49% Work 42% n=31 Figure C-3. Bicycle Trip Purpose at RM 2222 and Shoal Creek Boulevard in Austin Recreation 100% The bicycle trip purpose on Loop 360 in Austin is recreational, according to the nine surveys returned. n=9 Figure C-4. Bicycle Trip Purpose at Loop 360 in Austin C-6

83 Recreation 44% Work 56% n=9 Figure C-5. Bicycle Trip Purpose on Allen Parkway and Taft Street in Houston Recreation 19% Personal 4% Work 77% n=26 Figure C-6. Bicycle Trip Purpose at Braes Bayou Trail and South Main Street in Houston C-7